Hollis-Arrington
Hollis-Arrington v. Cendant Mortgage Corp.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Beverly Ann Hollis-Arrington appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in her action alleging that by denying her request for a forbearance to prevent foreclosure, Cendant Mortgage Corporation breached her mortgage contract and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, committed fraud, deceit, negligence, and intentionally inflicted emotional distress. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Henderson v. City of Simi Valley, 305 F.3d 1052, 1055 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.
Summary judgment was proper because Hollis-Arrington failed to show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact on any of her causes of action. See Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 701 F.2d 95, 97 (9th Cir.1983) (“neither a desire to cross-examine an affiant nor an unspecified hope of undermining his or her credibility suffices to avert summary judgment”).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by setting aside the clerk’s entry of default.' See O’Connor v. Nevada, 27 F.3d 357 , 364 (9th Cir.1994) (holding that determination to set aside default cannot be erroneous if defendant moved fast to set aside the default and…